Pages

Thursday, 27 April 2017

I
said in my Bayonetta review that ‘it doesn’t get much better than
this’. I was wrong. It does get better, and by ‘better’
I mean Bayonetta 2. As fantastic as I thought the original Bayonetta
was, it wasn’t a perfect game. Graphically, it was a little rough
in places and the frame rate would take the occasional hit.

The
camera could prove awkward during some battles, particularly some of
the larger boss battles. Oh, and by far the worst aspect of Bayonetta
was the rather unforgiving and pointless insta-death QTEs. Even
playing through the original twice on 360 and once on Wii U, these
moments still catch me out. I really don’t like them at all.

Bayonetta
2 fixes all of these issues. The frame rate is rock solid. The
camera is always perfectly placed. Graphically, it’s very polished,
and they removed the QTE nonsense entirely. But not only did they
completely fix my issues with the original game, they even improved
upon nearly every aspect of the original.

Visually,
Bayonetta 2 is stunning. Whereas the original was more dark and dour,
the sequel is bright and vibrant. There’s more variety to
environments and enemy design, all of which look absolutely amazing.
Bayonetta 2 is one of the most graphically engaging titles you’ll
ever play. As for the music, it’s all pretty
good, but I do think Bayonetta 1 had a stronger overall soundtrack.
If there’s one thing Bayo 1 did do better, it’s that.

The
combat, of course, is the most important element of Bayonetta 2. I
adored the combat of the original so much that I didn’t want some
fights to end. And yet, they’ve actually improved upon the combat
in some small, but very important ways.

The
combat of Bayonetta 2 feels refined to perfection. It feels more
fluid, with smoother transitions between combos, dodges and
animations. The controls feel more tight and responsive. It’s hard
to say exactly why it feels better – it just does. I can’t
be sure, but I do wonder if they’ve made the timing for dodge and
combo inputs slightly more forgiving, giving you an extra half a
second or so to pull them off.

As
a result, Bayonetta 2 does also feel quite a bit easier than the
original did, at least on the default Normal difficulty. But I don’t
see this as a bad thing, as these tweaks do make combat feel even
more fluid, responsive and enjoyable.

This
is also a result of a far better camera. Even during the larger
fights, the camera sensibly sweeps back and forth to give you the
most appropriate angle. Unlike the original, you won’t be taking
cheap hits because you couldn’t quite see what was coming.

Like
the original, Bayonetta 2 features multiple weapons, each with their
own attack style. You can combine them to create your own preferred
style and switch between custom sets on the fly, giving an incredible
variety to fights and a fantastic degree of replay value. You can
also unlock new characters to play. In fact, there’s so much to
unlock in Bayonetta 2 it’s kind of ridiculous – new weapons, a
varied range of combat modifiers, new moves, characters and outfits.

The
main story mode will take roughly 8-10 hours to complete, but there’s
a great degree of replay value through its different difficulty
modes, collectible items and, as I’ve said, the ability to play as
other characters with different weapons and attack styles. There’s
also a ‘trials’ mode you’ll unlock once you complete the story.

Oh,
and they also included a new ‘tag climax’ mode which is an
interesting mix of co-op and competitive play as you fight alongside
– but also compete against – either an AI or human companion
through a series of challenging fights.

One
thing I think you could argue the original did a little better
is story. The original has a surprisingly emotional aspect to it
which is a little lacking in the sequel. But I don’t think the
sequel really needed to retread the same narrative ground. The story
of Bayonetta 2 expands on the world and characters in a wonderful
way.

It
takes Bayonetta, quite literally, to hell and back. Purely as an
excuse to showcase an even greater variety of environments and
enemies, it’s pretty damn good. I also thoroughly enjoyed the trip
through time, which cleverly ties together and expands upon various
aspects of the original story.

Bayonetta
2 is one of the few games that I think comes close to being truly
perfect. But I’m not giving it a 10/10. Why? Because there’s one
thing that disappointed me, and that was the music – or lack of a
particular track, should I say.

At
no point in Bayonetta 2 does the fantastic Bayonetta 1 cover of ‘Fly
Me To The Moon’ play. I was waiting for it the entire game,
but it never came. If that track had kicked in during the
final phase of the final boss we’d have my first perfect 10/10
game. But it didn’t! Oh, and no final dance number?! So close,
Bayonetta 2! Soclose!

Friday, 21 April 2017

Saturday, 15 April 2017

The
Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker was originally released on the
GameCube in 2003. Spin on 10 years, and Nintendo released a HD
remaster of WW for the Wii U, which is the version I’m going to be
reviewing. It’s an important distinction to make, because the Wii U
remaster doesn’t only overhaul the graphical quality of the
original, but also includes alterations and additions to various
aspects of gameplay.

I
played WW on release and it quickly became one of, if not my
favourite of the Zelda games. Does this HD remaster do the original
game justice? Do the changes they’ve made improve the experience or
weaken it?

Honestly, it’s hard to say. It’s been over 10 years since I
played the GC version, and whilst I remembered quite a bit of the
original going into this remaster, there was a lot I totally forgot
about.

Also, in the years since WW released, numerous other games, including new Zelda
titles, have arrived and improved on many aspects of what WW did
right . . . and not so right. It was always going to be strange
playing WW immediately following Breath of the Wild, because BotW was
such a radical departure from the Zelda ‘formula’ that WW so
rigidly adheres to.

Has
the open freedom of BotW made previous Zelda games seem less . . .
good? I don’t think so, but I don’t think you can ignore the
impact it’s had on the series as a whole, both past and future.
Because although WW does adhere to a very rigid and linear structure
of progression, that’s not really my issue with it. No, it’s not
the strict, structured progression that’s the problem, but rather
how the game handles it.

Something
I didn’t remember about the original game was how easy the
whole thing is. We get off to a rather slow start as the game walks
you through an extended tutorial segment. The problem is, it never
really stops walking you through the content. The game will
always tell you exactly where to go and what to do.

There’s
no real challenge to the game. There’s no sense of mystery, of
figuring things out on your own. The solution to the dungeon puzzles
are all too obvious, as are the patterns to the boss fights. The Wind
Waker is easy, which isn’t itself a serious issue, it’s
more that it’s insultingly easy.

The
world of WW is a fairly large open ocean broken down into individual
tiles, each with its own unique island. But only a handful of these
islands are particularly substantial or important. And until you
progress far enough to unlock various items, the majority of these
islands won’t even be accessible.

If
you’re playing Wind Waker, you really need to follow the main quest
because there’s very little point to exploration until you’ve
unlocked all of the main items. It’s also far more enjoyable to
explore once you do, because without abilities such as the fast
travel system, or the new HD addition of the ‘upgraded’ sail,
it’s rather tedious getting about.

There
is side content in WW, but very little of it is advertised and none
of it is tracked. There’s some good stuff to be found, but you
really need to seek it out. And whilst many of the islands in the
game aren’t very important or offer any substantial content, they
do nearly always contain a treasure to collect or a puzzle to solve,
making your exploration feel worthwhile.

And
it’s important to note that whilst I dislike how heavily WW walks
you through its core content, and how easy it is, that doesn’t mean
the core content is bad. In fact, it’s actually pretty good.
All of the dungeons were fun to complete. Each was unique visually,
but also in terms of enemies, puzzles and bosses.

Each
dungeon had its own ‘theme’, usually based around a particular
puzzle mechanic or key item. And each featured its own unique boss
with a unique pattern to defeat. They’re all pretty clever, even if
they’re not particularly challenging. In this respect, WW has far
more entertaining and interesting dungeons than BotW.

And
I did enjoy a return to that sense of mechanical progression that
BotW somewhat lacked. Each dungeon gave me something new. Something
that opened up the world just a little more. The problem WW has
though, is that whereas BotW didn’t gate its content at all,
WW gates its content too heavily.

You
can never really shake the feeling that the game is just walking you
through everything, step by step. And this is even more apparent in
this HD remaster when it comes to your final main quest prior to
facing Ganon. It involves tracking down eight shards of the triforce.

In
the GC original, you had to first track down a sea chart for each,
pay for each chart to be deciphered, and then find the islands where
the pieces were located. But a lot of people apparently didn’t like
this, which is why they altered the quest in this remaster so that
only three of the pieces require a chart. The rest it just tells you
exactly where to find them.

I
can see why people would prefer this change, but it kind of bothers
me. I don’t recall having any issue with the way the quest was
handled originally. In fact, I remember quite liking that stage of
the game. With all my key items unlocked, I could now explore the
ocean as I pleased, taking my time with each chart until I discovered
every shard.

But
now the game practically just gives them to you, without any real
work. I can see why many may dislike the original version of this
quest and may find it tedious and slow, but I’m just not sure the
way they handle it in this remaster is the best possible solution.

Graphically,
this remaster looks fantastic. Link in this game is so damn
expressive. It is, overall, a more light hearted affair, with more
humour and silly characters and situations than some of the other
Zelda games, but it can be serious when it needs to.

In
fact, the story of WW is very good, and I really like the way it
plays upon a previous game in the series, as well as how it handles
both Zelda herself and especially Ganon. Here, Ganon isn’t just a
giant smoke monster, but an actual character. And when you reach the
end of the game and learn about what happened in the past and why the
world is the way it is, you can almost sympathise with the bastard.

I
also really like the ending, which is both bitter sweet, but also
hopeful for the future. Oh, and your final fight against Ganon is a
lot of fun with what may be best delivered final blow in the entire
series.

Some
other minor irritations I have to mention are the dodgy auto-jump
which doesn’t always work exactly the way you want. You may, for
example, just want to drop down from a ledge, but instead Link
decides to take a flying, suicidal leap. The game does have some
unfortunate frame rate issues. It really tanks whenever you get a few
ships firing cannons at the same time.

Overall,
The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker HD is a good remaster of a good
game, but I can’t really shake the feeling that I enjoyed the
original more. I don’t know if that’s because of the changes
they’ve made, or simply because Zelda, as a series, has evolved and
improved since. Even so, WW is still a lot of fun to play. Sailing
across that open ocean remains as enjoyable today as it did all those years
ago.

Friday, 7 April 2017

Tiberian
Sun is the sequel to the original Command and Conquer, continuing the
story of the GDI/NOD conflict. It’s set in a bleak future in a
world ravaged by the spread of tiberian – perfectly reflected in
the game through its gloomy environments and sound.

Despite
the incredibly cheesy live action cut scenes, this is a far more
sombre and serious title than the original in terms of story, visuals
and gameplay. It has a very different look and feel compared to C&C,
and not just because of its new isometric camera view.

The
atmosphere is fantastic. The maps are murky and … dirty. This is a
world where tiberian won, not NOD or GDI. Cities are in a state of
ruin. Bridges are collapsed. Ion storms cause havoc with technology.

And
now we have a third faction to contend with – the mutants. Known as
‘The Forgotten’ these are people who have been exposed to
tiberian and mutated as a result. They appear during both NOD and GDI
campaigns as either enemies or allies.

Unlike
the first C&C, you’re not playing as a faceless commander, but
as two named characters. For GDI you’re the ultimate badass
‘McNeil’ played by a bored looking Michael Biehn. For NOD, you’re
‘Slavik’ who is a hardcore Kane groupie and always does as he’s
told which doesn’t make him particularly interesting.

The
story is a little disjointed, with cut-scenes not always following on
logically from the actual missions. I’m assuming this is because
they began filming the cut-scenes before they’d fully planned the
actual campaigns. It results in a strange disconnect between some of
the live action scenes and some of the subsequent missions.

There
are entirely new units and buildings in Tiberian Sun, although many
are based on those in the original in an upgraded form. Several units
have secondary functions, such as the Nod tank that can dig itself
into a hole to become a fixed and partially shielded cannon
emplacement.

Like
the first game, GDI units tend to be more slow, powerful and
expensive, whilst the NOD units are cheap, fast and weak.
Unfortunately, like the first game, it’s also far easier and more
efficient to simply spam a couple of unit types in order to win. Unit
balance certainly isn’t a strong point. Thankfully, Tiberian Sun
does a far better job of providing variety throughout its missions.

It
also provides a degree of player choice, with optional missions to
undertake that will impact the ‘main’ mission to a limited
degree, such as destroying a small supply base in order to prevent
reinforcements during your main assault. There’s also more what you
might call ‘mini-missions’ which don’t revolve around base
building, but using a limited number of units to complete a specific
objective.

I’ve
never been a great fan of these types of missions in RTS, as they
tend to devolve into a lot of ‘save scum’ because every unit is
too valuable to lose. You end up exploring the hidden map to see
what’s ahead and then reload until you find the ‘safe’ path to
your objective. Not terribly exciting, and Tiberian Sun has a little
too many missions like this for my taste.

But
overall, I did enjoy the campaigns, probably the GDI campaign more
than NOD because Slavik was such a dull git. The unit variety is
decent, even if you’ll rarely make full use of it. The visuals are
nice. The story is a little weak but Kane is always fun to watch.
Tiberian Sun is better than the original. It’s a solid and
enjoyable RTS, but I’d rate it as good
rather than great.

Red
Alert 2 is generally regarded as the best of the Command Conquer
franchise. It’s the game that shifted the tone of the Red Alert
series away from sombre and serious into over the top and silly,
creating a clear distinction between it and the GDI/NOD games.

This
is reflected in both its story and gameplay. It’s bright, colourful
and extremely enjoyable to play. The faction rosters are excellent,
offering a diverse range of units ranging from the expected soldiers
and tanks, to the rather more fanciful psychics and giant squids. The
soviets certainly get the best toys which makes their campaign the
most fun.

That
said, I do prefer the allies campaign in terms of story. Because the
allies get Tanya and as much as I like RA1 Tanya, the Tanya of RA2 is
easily best Tanya.

In
terms of graphics, sound and animation, RA2 still looks and sounds
fantastic. The missions offer a decent variety of maps and
objectives. Unit balance is pretty good. If I had one main complaint
about Red Alert 2, it would be its length.

Several
missions, particularly in the allies campaign, can be completed in as
little as 8-10 minutes. Red Alert 2 is faster paced than the
original – which is something I like – but it does result in missions
that end rather abruptly. It really would have benefited by having
more multi-objective missions and maps that expand when certain
objectives are met.

Some
of the maps feel quite small and it’s far too easy to spam and rush
your way to victory. If you’re playing Red Alert 2, you really need
to play it with its excellent expansion – Yuri’s Revenge –
otherwise it may feel a little short and unsatisfying.

I
don’t have much more to say about Red Alert 2. It’s easily one
of, if not the best game in the Command and Conquer series with great
story, graphics, sound and excellent gameplay. Just be sure to play
it with its expansion. Up next? Tiberium Wars versus Red Alert 3.